linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH RFC 00/77] Re-design MSI/MSI-X interrupts enablement pattern

To: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/77] Re-design MSI/MSI-X interrupts enablement pattern
From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 11:46:06 -0400
Cc: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@redhat.com>, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>, Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, Andy King <acking@vmware.com>, Jon Mason <jon.mason@intel.com>, Matt Porter <mporter@kernel.crashing.org>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux390@de.ibm.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, iss_storagedev@hp.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-driver@qlogic.com, Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com>, "VMware, Inc." <pv-drivers@vmware.com>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=4VyhOrgIPoHGT/7G7udfP2Gifv4pcNA/GhX+A/dOLfc=; b=seMlYycMgTxoH6WK4YBv4g6qDuRZupaUKY4a6s+3QXIYh2RVFTd0/39aIZDm+ECg7w oNVDrOtqGwxm+pk7MP2e8gAcRvHlc4NhkogjJWdzov65s9LzAB/5BQJI5UqUZVpn6VEL 6WLekYqzfUllf68D2ATsurqpVTJVof8hTNJFC8IDPMA7DzPcT3bk+TtXz9PKTXqL9pj8 C7tteiHQpD4zrT7Qml9iatSP9H/eMsXGrhlXbCpj9/8G2Hp+wmU+D3acxvN90b9CTm23 eo7e0sKIo8g2uvZCFylGIoPzqBLtZtkbsBNIClef/aMbXD+XZfqfSAcc0LlWDMiaAtuG rFhw==
In-reply-to: <1381178881.1536.28.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com>
List-archive: <http://www.linux-mips.org/archives/linux-mips/>
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?Subject=help>
List-id: linux-mips <linux-mips.eddie.linux-mips.org>
List-owner: <mailto:ralf@linux-mips.org>
List-post: <mailto:linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=subscribe%20linux-mips>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ecartis@linux-mips.org?subject=unsubscribe%20linux-mips>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <cover.1380703262.git.agordeev@redhat.com> <1380840585.3419.50.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com> <20131004082920.GA4536@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <1380922156.3214.49.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com> <20131005142054.GA11270@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <1381009586.645.141.camel@pasglop> <20131006060243.GB28142@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <1381040386.645.143.camel@pasglop> <20131006071027.GA29143@dhcp-26-207.brq.redhat.com> <1381178881.1536.28.camel@bwh-desktop.uk.level5networks.com>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 09:48:01PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > There is one major flaw in min-max approach - the generic MSI layer
> > will have to take decisions on exact number of MSIs to request, not
> > device drivers.
> [...
> 
> No, the min-max functions should be implemented using the same loop that
> drivers are expected to use now.

Wheee... earlier in the thread I thought you guys were referring to
yourselves in the third person and was getting a bit worried. :)

-- 
tejun

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>